- 3,177
- 2,948
- Thread starter
- #161
Why is the standard here just talk about how other series don't get the same thing because the rules of canon there are just different. The whole point of the blog is to show the official intent on Pokémon Worldview/Settings and how all of that is meant to work.
We accept the anime as canon because it's stated that it all one Pokémon World and Masuda used the anime as references to things of the games.
We accept the Adventures manga as canon because of the interviews of how the manga needs to follow the rules of the Pokémon world and is there to show an aspect of the Pokémon world that the games can't show.
All the anime adaptations of the games are the same thing. So is games like Pokémon Masters, Magikarp Jump and Detective Pikachu.
Why is everyone here talking about this as if it's only a brand thing and not about the lore ? It's the same reason for why every single already accepted Spin-off is accepted as canon.
The interviews are in the blog and in the thread, but okay. Let's talk about the interviews again.
From the interviews with Hiroyuki Jinnai
With Observador
――Observador: In relation to canon and continuity, Detective Pikachu is its own universe, or is something more ?
HJ: In the world of Detective Pikachu, the Pokémon doesn't come out of Pokéballs, nor do they battle with other Pokémon, therefore, we fell what happens here is distant from the rest of the original world. However, we tried to add many elements to the game, that would make the player feel that there's a connection between the two worlds. We would want that the players find and identify that moments.
With Famitsu
--Famitsu: I'm going to go back and forth a bit, but what was the first image you had of the game as a whole?
Jinnai: The world view of "Pokemon" is very multi-layered. In the original "Pocket Monsters" series, the main games created by Game Freak, the story is mainly about Pokémon battles with the players themselves as trainers. And as I mentioned earlier, the story of Satoshi and Pikachu is depicted in the anime, making the world of "Pokemon" very rich. Other "Pokémon" games also offer new worlds to match their gameplay. In "Detective Pikachu," I had the image of enriching the world of "Pokemon" by developing a new story that is different from the main game and the anime. That's why I purposely eliminated the battle element in this work and focused on depicting the lives of people living together with Pokémon.
With The Verge
For Japanese game and toy maker Creatures, which is best-known for the Pokémon trading card game and multiple series spinoffs, the outlandishness of Detective Pikachu took a lot of convincing. “We really started with the concept of making Pikachu talk,” says Hiroyuki Jinnai, the producer of Detective Pikachu, who’s worked on the Pokémon franchise with creator Game Freak for more than two decades. The goal was to surprise people and alter the perception of the franchise’s most well-known face, Jinnai adds, in celebration of Pokémon’s 20th anniversary. “We really worked hard to come up with a justification and setting to make that work.” Jinnai, who’s also helped on and off as a producer and adviser on the Pokémon anime, says Game Freak has historically been quite protective of the world it's built. Executives at the game company, which operates as an independent entity with a stake in the Pokémon license alongside Nintendo and Creatures, often stopped writers on the TV program from taking liberties with pokémon, like imbuing the pocket monsters with too many human-like qualities. “It took a lot of convincing to let us break the rules,” Jinai says. The result is an utterly bizarre and yet lovably quaint video game that will no doubt find its place in the ever-expanding Pokémon canon.
Pick any of the statements used about other works being "canon". They are all about the world itself, about the lore and how the series works. Sometimes they have some unique things that doesn't scale between works (Such as Pokémon don't talking their own names in the games), while in general the reason for why there are so many Pokémon spin-offs is because they want to show a different aspect of the Pokémon World.
If The Anime, Adventures, Origins, Generations, Twilight Wings, Detective Pikachu, Magikarp Jump, Pokémon Masters and so much more spin-offs that aren't connected with the main games (Like Rangers and Stadium) are accepted as canon because of the nature of the setting and worldview, about the lore and how the world works, why can't the same be assumed for the other products, when the statement about being a normal thing being exactly from a interview about how that went with some of these works, but then they said "It's just the thing for every work".
What official statement can be used to say that every other Pokémon spin-off is an exception ? As far as I know the only reason for why everyone that is disagreeing with the thread s because "this isn't how canon is supposed to work" or "no other series works in that way", and that against official statements about the Pokémon world being of settings and the worldview about the lore are simply being ignored, "because that isn't how it's supposed to work".
Of course, various works can function in the way that you are saying. In fact the reason for why that is being used here is because it's just so common that everyone supposes that is just the rule and no other work in existence is different. Yet I can mention various works by WiZ Co.ltd that works exactly in the way of settings and worldview over individual worlds that aren't connected. And Pokémon just happens to be one work that is like that. Not every work is consistent with every other work in every single level, yet there's good enough complementary stuff there that can help to understand how the Pokémon world works, and that is the way that Pokémon is supposed to work.
Every single spin-off that appears out there (Like the recent New Pokémon Snap) is there to "show a new side of the Pokémon world" in a way that it works for the Pokémon world.
Is the whole control thing also for management and make the Pokémon brand more consistent ? Definitely. But it also has an impact on the lore. Detective Pikachu didn't follow the rules just because "Pokémon shouldn't look like humans", but because it also needed to expand the world of Pokémon in a way that the main games can't show in the same way as the anime. And the same is valid for most of the Pokémon spin-off materials.
Again, the reason for why I'm suggesting this change is because it's the same thing that the other Pokémon got and was accepted. I just showed how that was related to Pokémon Company control over the franchise and how that is intended to affect how one would see the lore of the franchise.
Is this a wrong approach and we shouln't accept it because it doesn't fit with out systems ? I'm fine with that. But then we would also need to remoe the information fom already accepted as canon products, because they are canon for the same reason all other Pokémon spin-offs are canon. Or most are canon, or none of them are canon.
We accept the anime as canon because it's stated that it all one Pokémon World and Masuda used the anime as references to things of the games.
We accept the Adventures manga as canon because of the interviews of how the manga needs to follow the rules of the Pokémon world and is there to show an aspect of the Pokémon world that the games can't show.
All the anime adaptations of the games are the same thing. So is games like Pokémon Masters, Magikarp Jump and Detective Pikachu.
Why is everyone here talking about this as if it's only a brand thing and not about the lore ? It's the same reason for why every single already accepted Spin-off is accepted as canon.
The interviews are in the blog and in the thread, but okay. Let's talk about the interviews again.
From the interviews with Hiroyuki Jinnai
With Observador
――Observador: In relation to canon and continuity, Detective Pikachu is its own universe, or is something more ?
HJ: In the world of Detective Pikachu, the Pokémon doesn't come out of Pokéballs, nor do they battle with other Pokémon, therefore, we fell what happens here is distant from the rest of the original world. However, we tried to add many elements to the game, that would make the player feel that there's a connection between the two worlds. We would want that the players find and identify that moments.
With Famitsu
--Famitsu: I'm going to go back and forth a bit, but what was the first image you had of the game as a whole?
Jinnai: The world view of "Pokemon" is very multi-layered. In the original "Pocket Monsters" series, the main games created by Game Freak, the story is mainly about Pokémon battles with the players themselves as trainers. And as I mentioned earlier, the story of Satoshi and Pikachu is depicted in the anime, making the world of "Pokemon" very rich. Other "Pokémon" games also offer new worlds to match their gameplay. In "Detective Pikachu," I had the image of enriching the world of "Pokemon" by developing a new story that is different from the main game and the anime. That's why I purposely eliminated the battle element in this work and focused on depicting the lives of people living together with Pokémon.
With The Verge
For Japanese game and toy maker Creatures, which is best-known for the Pokémon trading card game and multiple series spinoffs, the outlandishness of Detective Pikachu took a lot of convincing. “We really started with the concept of making Pikachu talk,” says Hiroyuki Jinnai, the producer of Detective Pikachu, who’s worked on the Pokémon franchise with creator Game Freak for more than two decades. The goal was to surprise people and alter the perception of the franchise’s most well-known face, Jinnai adds, in celebration of Pokémon’s 20th anniversary. “We really worked hard to come up with a justification and setting to make that work.” Jinnai, who’s also helped on and off as a producer and adviser on the Pokémon anime, says Game Freak has historically been quite protective of the world it's built. Executives at the game company, which operates as an independent entity with a stake in the Pokémon license alongside Nintendo and Creatures, often stopped writers on the TV program from taking liberties with pokémon, like imbuing the pocket monsters with too many human-like qualities. “It took a lot of convincing to let us break the rules,” Jinai says. The result is an utterly bizarre and yet lovably quaint video game that will no doubt find its place in the ever-expanding Pokémon canon.
Pick any of the statements used about other works being "canon". They are all about the world itself, about the lore and how the series works. Sometimes they have some unique things that doesn't scale between works (Such as Pokémon don't talking their own names in the games), while in general the reason for why there are so many Pokémon spin-offs is because they want to show a different aspect of the Pokémon World.
If The Anime, Adventures, Origins, Generations, Twilight Wings, Detective Pikachu, Magikarp Jump, Pokémon Masters and so much more spin-offs that aren't connected with the main games (Like Rangers and Stadium) are accepted as canon because of the nature of the setting and worldview, about the lore and how the world works, why can't the same be assumed for the other products, when the statement about being a normal thing being exactly from a interview about how that went with some of these works, but then they said "It's just the thing for every work".
What official statement can be used to say that every other Pokémon spin-off is an exception ? As far as I know the only reason for why everyone that is disagreeing with the thread s because "this isn't how canon is supposed to work" or "no other series works in that way", and that against official statements about the Pokémon world being of settings and the worldview about the lore are simply being ignored, "because that isn't how it's supposed to work".
Of course, various works can function in the way that you are saying. In fact the reason for why that is being used here is because it's just so common that everyone supposes that is just the rule and no other work in existence is different. Yet I can mention various works by WiZ Co.ltd that works exactly in the way of settings and worldview over individual worlds that aren't connected. And Pokémon just happens to be one work that is like that. Not every work is consistent with every other work in every single level, yet there's good enough complementary stuff there that can help to understand how the Pokémon world works, and that is the way that Pokémon is supposed to work.
Every single spin-off that appears out there (Like the recent New Pokémon Snap) is there to "show a new side of the Pokémon world" in a way that it works for the Pokémon world.
Is the whole control thing also for management and make the Pokémon brand more consistent ? Definitely. But it also has an impact on the lore. Detective Pikachu didn't follow the rules just because "Pokémon shouldn't look like humans", but because it also needed to expand the world of Pokémon in a way that the main games can't show in the same way as the anime. And the same is valid for most of the Pokémon spin-off materials.
Again, the reason for why I'm suggesting this change is because it's the same thing that the other Pokémon got and was accepted. I just showed how that was related to Pokémon Company control over the franchise and how that is intended to affect how one would see the lore of the franchise.
Is this a wrong approach and we shouln't accept it because it doesn't fit with out systems ? I'm fine with that. But then we would also need to remoe the information fom already accepted as canon products, because they are canon for the same reason all other Pokémon spin-offs are canon. Or most are canon, or none of them are canon.
